CORE: CWC trial environment & results. Harri Saarnisaari, TRIAL seminar

Transcription

1 CORE: CWC trial environment & results Harri Saarnisaari, TRIAL seminar

2 Measurement and analysis of WLAN usage in different spots at Oulu WLAN band analysis Is there free space for opportunistic spectrum usage in WLAN band? Usually much unused spectrum Results are in a DIthesis and a CORE report Location Average Duty Cycle [%] Average Busy Hour utilization [%] Sokos Hotel Arina Sensinode Ltd Toppila, part Toppila, part Haukipudas 4.5e-5 - CWC Tellus library, part Tellus library, part SEAA & DSD Airport of Oulu

3 3 LTE in WLAN Band, with RENESAS OFDM rederence design packet/frame format Our frame structure with LTE type parameters was modified to include a sensing period LBT (listen before talk feature) Aim was to evaluate by WARP platforms how LTE would operate and affect in WLAN band Sensing is essential Otherwise LTE steals most of capacity FRAME PREAMBLE TRAINING TIME 4 (us) 2 (16us) [symbols (duration)] FRAME TIME 4 (us) [symbols (duration)] SENSING PREAMBLE TRAINING CTRL HDR (BASE RATE) coded 4 (us) uncoded 2 (16us) 16 LTE-like DL frame format DL CTRL (BR) 4 (us) 2 (16us) coded 4 (us) Ue1 LBT-LTE 16 DL PL1 (FR) PAYLOAD DATA (FULL RATE) Max number of symbols 2047 DL PL2 (FR) DL PL3 (FR) 15 (120us) 15 (120us) 15 (120us) Payload length1 Payload length2 Payload length3 WLAN Ue2 BS AP Client 1m 1m 1m Throughput sensing on sensing off kbits/s WLAN on WLAN off WLAN on WLAN on LBT-LTE off LBT-LTE on LBT-LTE on LBT-LTE on WLAN 6740, , ,80 LBT-LTE 6390, , ,11 Ue3 Packet loss sensing on sensing off % WLAN on WLAN off WLAN on WLAN on LBT-LTE off LBT-LTE on LBT-LTE on LBT-LTE on WLAN 2,57 59,04 82,59 LBT-LTE 1,38 36,98 19,01

4 Trial Environment: our main effort Based on WARP platforms We had an ad hoc network Modified to include Base stations User devices Flexible frame structure CRTL, data, synchronization Uplink, downlink Cognitive engine (CE) for scheduling (load balancing) Simulator to support CE development GUI JAVA - close to WARP Load balancing algorithms To efficiently show what is going on in our demonstrations 3 DI theses describe these developments Software components: - GUI (Java) - Cognitive engine (Java) - Database (SQL + Java) - Message protocol (C) BS A WARP environment Management Layer BS C (common resource) Backbone BS B 4 Physical equipment: WARP v2 boards - Router - PCs Operational frequency bands: GHz GHz Network topolgy: Cellular, different operators, common shared resource Connection to VTT CNL (joint effort with VTT) VTT CE could be used

5 Demonstrations Evolutionary demonstration development From simple one to more complex one Final demonstration Comparison of cooperative and non-cooperative offloading 5 Two operators: A and B Both operators are serving two users A common resource Both operators have equal access to the common BS Non-cooperative use of common resource Wild West Cooperative use of common resource Civilized world Non-cooperative scenario Cooperative scenario Minimum number of slots available per operator 8 12 Maximum number of slots available per operator Minimum available throughput per operator (QPSK) 3 Mbit/s 4,5 Mbit/s Maximum available throughput per operator (QPSK) 6 Mbit/s 6 Mbit/s Fairness 50 % % 100 %

6 6 Demonstration Events ECC/ETSI/COST TERRA Cognitive Radio Workshop, Mainz, May 2012 FRUCT conference in Oulu November 5-9, 2012 Oulu, Finland: Benefits Of Cooperative Offloading In Cognitive Radio Networks. Voted as 2 nd best presentation of the demonstration event RF Measurements and Tests in the Oulu Region 4 December, 2012, Oulu Finland: Benefits Of Cooperative Offloading In Cognitive Radio Networks CORE workshop, Oulu, VTT, January 2013 Next WWRF in Oulu, April, With CORE+ touch Future Network and Mobile Summit 2013 (Funems 2013)? CORE+ Demonstration system will be further developed with CORE+ topics